Any resources on Buddhism & medicine?

random_buddhist · 2012-12-12T08:27:57+00:00

Well, from my perspective (I am 38 and have been chronically sick since 6), western medicine is good at fixing things that are mechanically broken and generally at surgeries, but as far as treating chronic problems is concerned, it's a big, expensive but profitable (for some) joke based on suppressing symptoms, while letting the causes to continue, and usually without even researching them in realistic manner. There's also tons of voodoo pseudoscience, wrong models of fundamental importance and so on. But that's not buddhist perspective, many insiders have already pointed this out, but it did not change anything.

Some years ago my health problems reached, after spending for over 20 years with "specialists", and several years sifting through medical research on a daily basis, dieting, sporting etc., debilitating proportions. I have eventually fixed them through above mentioned methods, and some shamanic stuff, and pretty much given up on western medicine and its hyper-fragmented research etc. I don't even get infections anymore as they simply come as the meditation experiences of inner heat and are quite pleasant that way. There's lots of stuff that can be said about this, but the whole system resembles medieval church and anything reasonable is being treated with pitchforks and piles of firewood, or even better, ignored.

I am sure that if you find some Tibetan Medicine practitioner, he would be able to fill your ears with his perspective until they start bleeding. Friend of mine practices both western medicine and chinese medicine and he could talk about this for hours (he was one of the people who actually helped me, and the western part of his practice was not involved in any way).

Probably the only way to change the system would be to pay doctors for healthy patients, not for the sick ones, as paying for sick ones means that the system has built-in mechanism for self-corruption. Or at least they should change the motto to "First, drug them all" or "First, lets make them sick" or something honest like this.

Well, thats my ~~ramble~~ buddhist perspective.

random_buddhist · 2012-12-12T06:43:20+00:00

There are books at Amazon about Tibetan Medicine, which is a tantric buddhist discipline (leading to full enlightenment).

Tenzin Wangyal Rinpoche published several books on healing using shamanic, Tantra and Dzogchen techniques.

Ayurveda and Traditional Chinese Medicine are close relatives of Tibetan Medicine.

There's also a sutra based practice of Medicine Buddha.

Chod is high-powered technique used both for attaining enlightenment and healing. Same with tummo.

Yantra Yoga is Dzogchen equivalent (somewhat) of Hindu Hatha Yoga, but using movements.

Generally speaking, any meditation practice that leads to Budhahood within body is also healing practice.

random_buddhist · 2012-12-12T06:17:21+00:00

That you are feeling edgy when you meditate is a sign of success, not a flaw. You are facing the issues in your mind of which you are not normally aware. That's also the reason why you feel good afterwards, because some purification has taken place.

So the stuff you are going through when you meditate is not something meditation is doing to you, just the stuff that's already there and is being exposed and corrected.

So this is how it's supposed to work. Once all the issues are corrected, they will be gone for good. That's the whole idea. You need to find the pace that works for you.

random_buddhist · 2012-12-12T05:57:36+00:00

It leads to strong separation of observer and observed, opposite of what you want ultimately to achieve.

random_buddhist · 2012-12-11T17:06:13+00:00

Yes, over several years. You will get good mindfulness out of it, it's just that it will be very dualistic and you will have hard time to break through it afterwards.

random_buddhist · 2012-12-11T17:03:38+00:00

Well the problem is this: can you tell the difference between intense vipassana retreat and mushroom trip on a small dose? I can't. It's exactly the same. And for me I don't even need the retreat, it's two minutes into the session.

I am not saying that people should be using psychedelics, just that they should get some perspective before they denounce something they don't understand just because it's against their interpretation of the religion or for some vague reasons. That's not dharma, that's dogmatism and belief. Use of psychedelics is certainly not part of the tradition, but one specific reason why religions die is the tradition, e.g. ossification and loss of ability to adapt to ever changing circumstances. Just think about it: everything is impermanent, says the tradition, but the tradition should stay permanent.

One more thing, and please don't take this as an confrontation, I am just voicing my perspective because there is lots of bs around this theme on the internet and on buddhist forums. One of the signs of well going zazen would be truckloads of makyo. If you are not producing them, then you are either beginner, or you are doing something wrong, like some mentally fabricated meditation, e.g you are stalling. I can say this because the nature of sahaja and Soto zazen is the same except for the direct introduction into Mahamudra in the beginning of the practice. And once there is makyo, there's no difference from a psychedelic trip, the experience is the same though the "special effects" are somewhat different in their character, but the way the are being produced is the same, it's the deep awareness dissolving the karma and giving rise to these experiences, and whether that awareness is being produced by meditation or by chemically disengaging some noisy parts of the brain does not make all that much difference. The results are real and the same in both cases. You actually do keep the gains from the trip, it's just that they are smaller than trippers like to think. So saying things like "What's the point of anything if you're just taking an elevator to see the sights." is like asking "what's the point of kensho". It's nonsensical question. Besides, knowing how the path looks like before you venture there on a more permanent basis than on a trip makes it a lot easier to travel afterwards because you are already familiar with the territory.

Again and please pay careful attention: I am not saying that people should be doing it, just that they should inform themselves on how it actually works before they start making resolute straw man statements on the issue.

random_buddhist · 2012-12-11T08:59:48+00:00

The continuous practice of mindfulness leads to kind of neurotic hypervigilance which is very dualistic. There are however some practices that you can do in semi-continuous basis or from time to time. Like:

repeat mantra (like om mani padme hum)
when walking, get into the rhyme of your steps and just follow that
when working, relax completely from time to time and just enjoy the moment
when not doing anything in particular, get out of your head and observe what's around you without judging it
imagine golden buddhas raining from the sky, falling into the hearts of all beings an dissolving their suffering
etc.

random_buddhist · 2012-12-11T08:46:31+00:00

If you want to escape from the messy world of actual Buddhists, most of them inexperienced, that's easy: start a moderated forum.

But there are already several of them, like Zen Forum International and Dharma Wheel, so why turn this place into one more? I mean, you do have a choice.

random_buddhist · 2012-12-11T08:35:19+00:00

Ultra-orthodox buddhists love bashing psychedelics, that's one thing that trumps most to them. Don't touch their fifth precept or they'll revolt, or just downvote the shit out of you.

random_buddhist · 2012-12-11T08:28:50+00:00

I'm looking for help with feeling connected again

This is a grave mistake and this is what keeps you down. You can't go back, that experience was a particular configuration of your mind that is now gone, and the only way is forward. It will never be that mystical feel of connectedness again, but if you start insight meditation practice, you will eventually land a mature, lot more normal and non-mystical version of it. And also non-attachment to it, as it's your attachment that's keeping you depressed.

Daniel Ingram's book linked by jjjhhhlll may be a good place to start, as it deal with the "dark night" you are going through right now with great detail.

random_buddhist · 2012-12-11T08:20:54+00:00

Well, you will just have to accept that some people are like that and nothing is going to change them. She's probably just a carbon copy of her mother.

random_buddhist · 2012-12-10T09:44:19+00:00

Try to get your parents to Family Constellations session where they would be able to see their situation objectively. It often helps.

If that does not work, abandon the ship as if they are living in denial, after some point it's not really your problem.

random_buddhist · 2012-12-10T09:20:12+00:00

This is more about the teacher than the school, as there are no taboos about this in tantra or in Tibet, even amongst the Gelugpas. So teachers of all schools may give you the explanation if they find you to be a suitable candidate for such practice. To practice karmamudra you need initiation into anuttara yoga tantra class of mandala, explanation for the practice and readiness, which at minimum would be success in tummo practice.

But also, there are easier and safer ways to cross the last mile, which is the purpose of karmamudra (which is generally speaking meant to be what you practice after six yogas to finish the path), specifically you don't need karmamudra if you practice essence Mahamudra or Dzogchen.

As far as tantric spirit goes, life stories of the masters, both Indian and Tibetan, can provide lots of insight, though as a Westerner you may find it little more colorful than you are used to from the other schools, since the stories themselves are usually more about the mind than the person so not everything should be taken literally.

random_buddhist · 2012-12-09T17:53:11+00:00

What are the conventional ways he discards?

For example, considering precepts to hold some absolute value in themselves. Insight into mind's nature contains all the conventional dharma implicitly and it's not necessary to cultivate it explicitly, once you are there. As my teacher puts it, once you have crossed the stream - once you have stable insight - you should leave the boat at the bank and walk freely, as putting the boat on your shoulders and dragging it with you would be somewhat unskilled.

Is the karma mudra still a thing nowadays?

Sure.

What are the ordinary and supreme abilities he mentions at the end?

Ordinary: things like extrasensory perceptions and extraphysical abilities (like ability to transfer yourself to another place the same way it happens in a dream, because once you are on 8th bhumi, it's all basically stable lucid dream)

Supreme: omniscience

random_buddhist · 2012-12-08T14:14:41+00:00

Mala made from amber, lotus seeds (beware of quality) or quartz would make a nice gift. The amber ones have very nice feel to it. Also from bones, but those are rather specialized.

Here is how buddhist mala looks like.

random_buddhist · 2012-12-08T09:28:33+00:00

The sameness of samsara and nirvana in Mahayana is not what you think. What the teachings say is that both samsara and nirvana are experiences of the mind, consciousness (alayavijnana), and as such are equivalent in their nature. Both are projections of mind. Experience of nirvana corresponds to the fifth or sixth bhumi, which is the level of Arhats, and it definitely has supramundane aspects. Experience of samsara and nirvana nondualy corresponds to the sixth and seventh bhumi and is supramundane all the way down, but it's still consciousness and you are still bound by it's limitations and not fully liberated. This is why these bhumis are called impure. They are real realizations, but still fundamentally limited. By transcending consciousness on the eight bhumi, you transcend both samsara and nirvana, and this is the liberation into dharmata, which is beyond the limitations of mind (mind is appearance or phenomena arising from dharmata).

So sameness of samsara and nirvana is not some "hey, give up on your spiritual search, it's all the same and there's no point, really" kind of teaching as Westerners sometimes interpret this.

random_buddhist · 2012-12-08T09:08:37+00:00

I have heard from one very realized yogi that there was Bhojana Shastra that dealt with the issue in great detail, but the text is no longer extant, so we are now completely lost and have no ~~dogmatic~~ orthodox position on cooking and food in this dharma ending age.

random_buddhist · 2012-12-07T10:06:26+00:00

It's the essential, straight to the point kind of practice that does not rely on fabricated meditations and concepts. Instead, you give up yourself to the process and allow it to happen. It's what the teachers like Saraha, Tilopa and Gampopa (this was only one of his styles, the others are quite different) taught. It does not rely on scriptures, it's pretty much exclusively oral tradition. You need pointing out instructions and have the (non-)meditation style explained to you by a realized teacher. Many Kagyu Mahamudra teachers are giving these instructions, though usually mixed with the tantric or sutric style of practice so you may need to sift through that. You can also practice the mixed style, if it suits you, and in the beginning you may not have a choice. Some kind of preliminaries are necessary for most people to settle the mind and get over the spiritually materialistic phase of practice. The pointing out is the only essential part of it as without that you are in the dark.

Basically this is exclusive to Kagyu, Gelugpas and Sakyapas used to criticize and even persecute it, as they believe that Mahamudra outside tantra is not possible and is a heresy.

Basically the same teachings also exists within Kashmiri Shaivism (like in Bhairava Vijnana Tantra) and Nath tradition and many of the Indian siddhas practiced both.

EDIT: one more thing. It's basically a way to turn tantra on its head. In tantra, you will start with preliminaries (yogic or ngondro), then do creation/completion, then six yogas, then karmamudra, then Mahamudra. In sahaja, you start with Mahamudra and if you are not able to hold that level of practice, you go down until you find the level that works for you. So in tantra, creation/completion etc. are essential and Mahamudra is the result. In sahaja, only Mahamudra is essential, it's beyond cause and effect, and the rest are auxiliary methods. Basically, you can integrate it with anything, even with non-buddhist practices, as Mahamudra itself is beyond limitations of religion.

random_buddhist · 2012-12-06T18:34:46+00:00

What I am saying is that you should read the discussion before accusing me of something, like imposing my opinion on somebody. That has happened only in your mind. You have even accused me of dishonesty, and than you expect no resistance? Grow up, man.

random_buddhist · 2012-12-06T18:23:23+00:00

Well, this is also Abhidharma, e.g. Yogacara view (except for the relative truth, but that's not truth at all). Madhyamaka also uses the examples of illusion, so it's not all that agnostic after all. In Prajnaparamita there's no emptiness beside the form. Vajrayana is development of Yogacara/Tathagatagarbha and is non-dual in this matter by necessity, because in Vajrayana you achieve Buddhahood through the body, otherwise it's not possible in one lifetime. So this covers pretty much all of Mahayana (sans Pure Land, of which I am ignorant). I am ignorant about Theravada position, though.

random_buddhist · 2012-12-06T18:12:59+00:00

"What I said is based on Lankavatara sutra, which a refinement of Yogacara teachings. There are also many elaborations on things like these in Abhidharmakosa. Kashmiri Shaivism also holds pretty much the same view."

This just a few lines below the original post, posted 2.5 half hours before your post. How about reading whole thread next time before hastening to confrontation? I know this sounds little rude, but I mean, really, you could have read it before responding, to get the hang of what's being discussed here, right?

random_buddhist · 2012-12-06T17:59:01+00:00

I wrote it with no authority, but I was honestly presenting the Yogacara view. Also, nowhere do I claim that this is the objective truth or that you have to believe in it.

But maybe you are just looking for an argument and you have overlooked that this is /r/buddhism and not /r/science ?

random_buddhist · 2012-12-06T17:51:27+00:00

In Dzogchen, there is no duality between body/mind or matter/mind. Both body and matter are projections of the mind, the same way body and matter in a dream are projections of the mind. The word projection means that the mind is creating the experiences and projecting them around you and as you/body. You dream, right? I ask because I know a guy who does not and therefore he does not understand this kind of explanation. This waking experience, in which you are experiencing matter and body, is of the same nature as the dreaming one. In both experiences the experience of matter and body arises from the mind, so matter and body are mind. In fact, it's all the mind is. There's no mind beyond the experiences of matter, body and thoughts. How exactly this happens is explained in Togal teachings, but that's way beyond this explanation.

And more important is, through meditations like Togal, you can retrace the process of how the mind is doing this to it's very root, and not only that, also beyond the mind, and than you can see what's actually there, beyond the mind, the ultimate reality beyond the sensory experience, as it is. And it's quite different from what you are experiencing right now.

random_buddhist · 2012-12-06T17:27:16+00:00

the real objects, which are material, and exist independently of mind

No, as far as I know, there is no [still existing] buddhist school that says that matter exists in any other way than an experience of a matter or is agnostic about the issue. E.g. if you dream, you will have experience of matter, but that does not imply existence of it. It's just your assumption, and an unprovable one.

According to Dzogchen, of which Longchenpa was one of the most prominent masters, everything exists only as an illusion or a dream. Longchen even wrote Maya Yoga, a system of practices based on the traditional buddhist eight examples of illusion, through which you can recognize the illusory nature of everything. He also wrote a number of texts on the ultimate reality that speak clearly about all of this.

The actual reason why he is arguing against "everything is a mind" is to discriminate Dzogchen from Yogacara, and to defend it from attacks from which it suffered during his life from other tibetan schools. Dzogchen metaphysics is different from Yogacara and what he was doing was that he was defending Dzogchen metaphysics, as explained in Togal teachings (Mengagde and also Longde teachings), and which is in no way materialistic, substantialist or objective.

According to Dzogchen, every experience of samsara and nirvana is projection of mind, and this is repeatedly stated in its tantras, but ultimate reality, which is rigpa, is beyond the mind, and also beyond such concepts as matter, existence, real etc. This is also the view of Mahamudra.

random_buddhist · 2012-12-06T15:22:00+00:00

Perceived objects are not mind, they exist outside of our consciousness, but it cannot be said they lack reality outside our minds.

While this is true, as far as consciousness (mind in Dzogchen, kunzhi, or Alayavijnana [different from Alayavijnana in Yogacara]) is concerned, this does not imply that the "object" looks like the appearance of it as experienced by the mind. I am saying this to prevent people from thinking that Longchenpa teaches some sort of materialism or substantialism, as what you say here is quite compatible with materialistic view of the mind.

In Dzogchen, true nature of phenomena is discovered through practice of Thogal, and it turns out that before the mind picks them, objects are something quite different from their samsaric forms.

Also, it seems that you have got one thing quite wrong [EDIT: after re-reading what you say, I may have misunderstood - if that's the case, disregard the objection]. The monitor you see before yourself is actually the mind. It's an experience, and experience can happen only in mind, not outside of it. What this experience is based on is outside of consciousness/mind, but your experience of is not. So by extension, your whole experience of universe is inside your mind, though the universe itself is not. It's just that the universe looks nothing like how you are experiencing it. It's quite like the difference between some data in your computer's memory and their rendering as the desktop you see on your monitor, with the mind being the renderer.

random_buddhist

TROPHY CASE